Interpersonal Injustice and Workplace Deviance

Ferris, D. Lance; Spence, Jeffrey R.; Brown, Douglas J.; Heller, Daniel

doi:10.1177/0149206310372259

Cited by 158 publications

(147 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

138

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These results also contribute to the customer mistreatment literature by presenting a systematic test of a theoretical perspective that has been postulated and inferred (Amarnani et al, ; Dormann & Zapf, ; Koopmann et al, ; Shao & Skarlicki, ; Skarlicki et al, ) but that has remained untested: self‐esteem threat. This line of thinking is consistent with broader work on how unfair treatment from others can lead to counterproductive behavior by threatening self‐esteem (Ferris et al, ). However, the experience of and reaction to self‐esteem threat can be quite idiosyncratic (Tesser, )—people may show immense variability in their experience of and reaction to esteem threats depending on various features of their self‐concept (Amarnani et al, ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Age as double‐edged sword among victims of customer mistreatment: A self‐esteem threat perspective

Amarnani

Restubog

Bordia

et al. 2019

Human Resource Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Service workers are expected to maintain high‐quality service delivery despite customer mistreatment—the poor‐quality treatment of service workers by customers—which can be demeaning and threatening to self‐esteem. Although service work is increasingly delivered by middle‐aged and older workers, very little is known about how employees across the age range navigate abuse from customers on the job. Does advancing age help or hinder service performance in reaction to customer mistreatment? Drawing on strength and vulnerability integration theory, we proposed that age paradoxically both helps and hinders performance after customer mistreatment, albeit at different stages. We tested our proposed model in a two‐sample field investigation of service workers and their supervisors using a time‐lagged, dyadic design. Results showed that age heightens the experience of self‐esteem threat but, nevertheless, dampens reactions to self‐esteem threat, leading to divergent effects on performance at different stages. Implications for age and service work, as well as aging and the sense of self, are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Age as double‐edged sword among victims of customer mistreatment: A self‐esteem threat perspective

Amarnani

Restubog

Bordia

et al. 2019

Human Resource Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In organizational research, both self-verification (Ferris, Spence, Brown, & Heller, 2012;Swann, Polzer, Seyle, & Ko, 2004) and self-enhancement postulates (Hideg & Ferris, 2014;Pfeffer & Fong, 2005) are interwoven into many topics in organizational behavior; by positioning contingent self-esteem as an index of whether or not individuals self-verify or self-enhance in a particular domain, our results similarly speak to the broad swath of research questions implicated by these theories. Despite the fact that these theories make contradictory predictions regarding the relation of self-esteem level to behavioral outcomes, research on each theory continues apace, seemingly ignoring the apparent contradiction between the theories.…”

Section: Implications For Self-esteem and Motivation Literaturesmentioning

confidence: 64%

Ostracism, Self-Esteem, and Job Performance: When Do We Self-Verify and When Do We Self-Enhance?

Ferris

Lian

Brown

et al. 2015

AMJ

Self Cite

241

246

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-esteem level has been positioned as a key mediating mechanism accounting for the effects of ostracism on behaviors, invoking the notion that individuals seek to verify their self-perceptions by behaving consistent with those self-perceptions. However, evidence supporting the relation of ostracism and self-esteem level to behavioral outcomes has been mixed. We argue that such mixed effects arise because individuals may alternately seek to verify their self-perceptions via behavioral outcomes (suggesting a relation between self-esteem level and behavioral outcomes), or selfenhance via behavioral outcomes regardless of self-esteem level (suggesting no relation between self-esteem level and behavioral outcomes); the larger question is when we self-verify and when we selfenhance. To that end, we position contingent self-esteem -or the extent to which an individual bases their self-worth on outcomes in a particular domain -as a determining factor in whether we self-verify or self-enhance and present a moderated mediation model to account for varying relations between ostracism and job performance. Our predictions regarding selfverification and self-enhancement motivation are fully supported across an experimental pilot study and two field samples using multi-wave, multisource study designs. Theoretical and practical implications for selfverification and self-enhancement motivation, as well as negative interpersonal behaviors at work, are discussed.We thank the participants of Singapore Management University's Research Seminar Series for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper, and Luke Brun-Ping and Shereen Fatimah for their assistance with data collection. ABSTRACTSelf-esteem level has been positioned as a key mediating mechanism accounting for the effects of ostracism on behaviors, invoking the notion that individuals seek to verify their selfperceptions by behaving consistent with those self-perceptions. However, evidence supporting the relation of ostracism and self-esteem level to behavioral outcomes has been mixed. We argue that such mixed effects arise because individuals may engage in behaviors alternately to verify their self-perceptions (suggesting a relation between self-esteem level and behavioral outcomes) or to self-enhance (suggesting no relation between self-esteem level and behavioral outcomes).Within this framing, the question becomes when we self-verify and when we self-enhance. To that end, we position contingent self-esteem -or the extent to which individuals base their selfworth on outcomes in a particular domain -as a determining factor in whether we self-verify or self-enhance and present a moderated mediation model to account for varying relations between ostracism and job performance. Our predictions regarding self-verification and self-enhancement motivation are fully supported across two field samples using multi-wave, multi-source study designs. Theoretical and practical implications for self-verification and self-enhancement motivation, as well as negative interpers...

show abstract

“…Spector & Fox, 2005) because these behaviors signal one's dissatisfaction and that the harmful behavior will not be tolerated (Allred, 1999;Averill, 1982;Tavris, 1982). These behaviors are a common reaction to injustice that are often used to "balance the scales" (e.g., Barclay, Skarlicki, & Pugh, 2005;Ferris, Spence, Brown, & Heller, 2012).…”

Section: Understanding the Disparate Behavioral Reactions Elicited Bymentioning

confidence: 99%

In the Aftermath of Unfair Events: Understanding the Differential Effects of Anxiety and Anger

Barclay

Kiefer

2017

Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After decades of domination by social exchange theory and its focus on a manager-centered perspective, fairness scholars have recently issued numerous calls to shift attention toward understanding employees’ subjective “lived-through” experiences and in situ responses to unfair events. Using appraisal theories, we argue that focusing on the employee’s perspective highlights the importance of emotions in fairness experiences. Further, this emphasis creates opportunities for novel insights regarding the emotions that are likely to be relevant, the constructive responses that can emerge from unfairness, and the interplay between unfair events and entity fairness judgments. Using a daily diary study with event sampling, we highlight the importance of anger and anxiety in understanding how individuals experience and react to unfair events. Results indicated that anger elicited counterproductive work behaviors, whereas anxiety initiated problem prevention behaviors (i.e., a subdimension of proactive work behavior). Further, by engaging in problem prevention behaviors, employees can positively influence their subsequent overall fairness judgments. Experiences of an unfair event can also be shaped by individuals’ preexisting overall fairness judgments, such that preexisting overall fairness judgments are negatively associated with anger but positively associated with anxiety. Implications for theory and practice are discussed, including the influential role of emotions for fairness experiences, how employees’ own behaviors can influence subsequent overall fairness judgments, the interplay between unfair events and entity judgments, and ensuring that fairness is effectively managed on a daily basis.

show abstract

Interpersonal Injustice and Workplace Deviance

Cited by 158 publications

References 87 publications

Age as double‐edged sword among victims of customer mistreatment: A self‐esteem threat perspective

Age as double‐edged sword among victims of customer mistreatment: A self‐esteem threat perspective

Ostracism, Self-Esteem, and Job Performance: When Do We Self-Verify and When Do We Self-Enhance?

In the Aftermath of Unfair Events: Understanding the Differential Effects of Anxiety and Anger

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About